All this fear the FAA will crack down on FPV pilots is much ado about nothing. The FAA can't even enforce its regulations and FARS for licensed, highly regulated, supposedly "policed," commercial pilots.

You think they're going to be roaming around the countryside collaring little Johnny flying a 1 lb foam plane in the park? All they will do is issue "regs/rules/etc." and use them in a court case if anything *really* bad happens. Just like marijuana laws, or millions of other "law" on the books. Only enforced when it's politically expedient or somebody in power gets PO'd enough.

Man, that article reads like a witch hunt.
I know several commercial pilots, and they generally convey that
aside from the flying itself, it's a pretty miserable job. Underpaid for
long hours, horrible schedules, and bureaucracy. If they can take some enjoyment
from their job by snapping the occasional interesting photo from the cockpit,
then more power to them. At least they're actively looking out the windows.
As a passenger, I'd rather have a happy flight crew than a bored or
disgruntled one.

All this fear the FAA will crack down on FPV pilots is much ado about nothing. The FAA can't even enforce its regulations and FARS for licensed, highly regulated, supposedly "policed," commercial pilots.

You think they're going to be roaming around the countryside collaring little Johnny flying a 1 lb foam plane in the park? All they will do is issue "regs/rules/etc." and use them in a court case if anything *really* bad happens. Just like marijuana laws, or millions of other "law" on the books. Only enforced when it's politically expedient or somebody in power gets PO'd enough.

It seems the commercial pilots are of the mindset "Do as I say and not as I do"

Quote:

Originally Posted by from the article

Not all pilots agree with the rule, and many donít appear to know its finer details. Some said the regulation is unrealistic and unnecessary, particularly on long-haul flights that last more than six hours. They would prefer rules that better balanced between managing boredom and the safety concerns of distraction.

OH, so you want a balanced rule Yeah, so do we!

So now we have pilots turning in drones, and drone pilots turningin commercial pilots.... What a mess, I only see it getting worse.

It seems the commercial pilots are of the mindset "Do as I say and not as I do"

OH, so you want a balanced rule Yeah, so do we!

So now we have pilots turning in drones, and drone pilots turning in commercial pilots.... What a mess, I only see it getting worse.

I was quite amused with the hypocrisy on display, considering how many "real" or licensed pilots I've seen here on RCG say disparaging things about the FPV crowd. FPVers use 1 lb foam toys to take our sky pictures. "Real" pilots use 250,000 lb planes filled with hundreds of innocents to take their cool pictures. And they're worried about us?

One question for the commercial pilots: Where did all the UFOs go? Why aren't commercial pilots reporting UFOs anymore?
Answer: Because now anything they see or think they see is automatically labeled a "drone" and reported as such.

One question for the commercial pilots: Where did all the UFOs go? Why aren't commercial pilots reporting UFOs anymore?
Answer: Because now anything they see or think they see is automatically labeled a "drone" and reported as such.

Yeah, because no one calls your sanity into question if you see a drone...

As has been said already in this thread- what is most ironic about this article is that it won't convey the shock and awe to the public that flying a foamie at the park does. Even though THREE fatal accidents have occurred due to these crew members acting foolishly.

Makes me wonder why- but maybe it's because the public thinks someone who has been trained and licensed has the experience to decide when and if to deviate from the rules. That's just silly, but maybe that attitude will be one positive result after we all are required to be licensed? I guess we'll see soon enough...

Man, that article reads like a witch hunt.
I know several commercial pilots, and they generally convey that
aside from the flying itself, it's a pretty miserable job. Underpaid for
long hours, horrible schedules, and bureaucracy. If they can take some enjoyment
from their job by snapping the occasional interesting photo from the cockpit,
then more power to them. At least they're actively looking out the windows.
As a passenger, I'd rather have a happy flight crew than a bored or
disgruntled one.

Is an FPV pilot cruising their 1 lb foam "drone" 1 mile away at 800 ft AGL when the NAS ceiling/floor in that area is 4300/2300 a hazard?

FAA insists that the NAS extends to the surface. Don't confuse NAS with various levels of controlled airspace. FAA has authority over ALL airspace (their position) both controlled, and uncontrolled. Plus they now say all airspace is "navigable" because multirotors, etc. can use that airspace.

Is an FPV pilot cruising their 1 lb foam "drone" 1 mile away at 800 ft AGL when the NAS ceiling/floor in that area is 4300/2300 a hazard?

Uh, where about do you reckon the NAS floor is 2300 or 4300 ft?

The FAA has a valid concern for BLOS flight, especially in higher traffic areas, but actually anywhere. There is no see and avoid with FPV, and the FAA cares very little about keeping a hobbyist happy and very much about keeping full scale collision free. Living both sides of the fence here, and I understand both sides pretty well.

At any rate, unless it is a populated area, 800 foot is perfectly in the realm for an airplane to be at.

As for the OP, no the FAA is generally not staffed to go looking for FPV folks. They are a pretty busy group. Don't give them a reason to come looking for you. Stay safe, stay smart. I would be willing to bet that there will be some notable prosecutions in the future of a few who do not stay safe/smart.

FAA insists that the NAS extends to the surface. Don't confuse NAS with various levels of controlled airspace. FAA has authority over ALL airspace (their position) both controlled, and uncontrolled. Plus they now say all airspace is "navigable" because multirotors, etc. can use that airspace.

Yes, I mistyped. I meant to say "controlled" airspace ceiling/floor. My point is still valid. A 1 lb foam drone at 800 ft AGL constitutes no hazard to any pilot staying within controlled airspace 2300/4300. If pilots stay where they're supposed to, and "drone" operators stay out of the controlled airspace like they're supposed to, this is a complete non-issue. But, as we all know, licensed, commercial pilots don't always follow the regs. And "drone" operators don't always stay within recommended guidelines. Which brings me back to the reason I posted the link to the article.

Except in places where controlled airspace reaches to the ground, (class B, C, D around
the airport), general aviation can legally fly below controlled airspace, down to manned
minimums, which are 500ft above populated areas, and all the way to the deck in
unpopulated areas. Private pilots often fly low around the edges of major population
centers specifically to avoid entering controlled airspace.

This Quartz article is too funny, must be some hyperbole. I mean I belong to a large (fullsize) flying club and we have a regular photo competition in the club magazine. They encourage pilots to take pictures while flying, and use phablets and iPads, and stream bluetooth music into the intercoms, etc. And I have even put a HD cam on my headset let it run so there is no messing with it - get video of landing phase without distraction.